timesjoke

Then you keep doing it over and over. If the guy refuses to even reply when you introduce yourself he obviously has an issue of some sort. His walking away would have me being more and more persistant. Sadly it is not your kid I am concerned about. While he knows your child is well taken care of, he now knows what kids are not well taken care of. Nobody said he was going to leave, at least not under his own power Clearly I offer the time at my range as a warning that I am not just armed, but well trained in the use of firearms. It is a clear and direct threat to anyone who has bad intentions. His last victim was my friend, her name was Kimberly Leach and was 12 years old at the time. Killing her was not the worse thing he had done to her. I can tell you this, if I catch someone like that, they will never see a courtroom.

I have to agree. I cannot imagine America doing well in the long run when most of our jobs are based on the service industry.

So when Wez makes a post against another site (as he does quite often) he is breaking the rules right? I cannot even estimate how many times Wez has bashed other forums and even chased eddo around about things that have happened at other forums. Fair is fair, if someone cannot come here to "reply" to something Wez said here against them, then Wez should not be allowed to comment about them at all. IMHO

My town had a very horrible loss to Ted Bundy, some of you may have heard of him. The little girl he killed was a friend of my family (her mom and my mom were good friends and we played together many times). Even the lazy parents here tend to get hostile if you even hint at a child predator being around. The cops here take every step possible to check out anyone who is reported to be watching kids. Many get very clear requests to leave town on their own or be removed. Believe me, if he is what you fear, he knows you very well and if he wants to do something bad, he will wait for a time or place when your not around. You can't protect them all, this is true, and you will go crazy trying. Do what you can and go from there. Sometimes the direct method works the best. Anyone I don't know that I have questions about I walk right up to them, look them in the eye, put out my hand and introduce myself. I put out a friendly tone but leave no doubt in their minds that I am checking them out. I will talk to them a little and if I get any bad feelings about them I will go into my "I teach firearm safety" routine that includes me showing them the gun I always carry. I will stay friendly and invite them to my home to target shoot at my private shooting range. For some reason, those that I get bad feelings from never seem to hang around anymore.........I have no idea why.

I did not see on his list "troll random forums".

Not with an armed parent watching, at least that is how it works where I live.

I have to agree with IWS. The liberals arew trying to create one huge daycare facility called America where everyone is taken care of and all it takes is 95% of your income every week. That's worth it right? Wrong! If someone messes up, fine, mistakes happen but that mistake does not mean everyone else should pay for that one guy's mistake.

Well, I know your where your comming from, I turned about 2 acres of my back yard into a playground with 7 wooden swingsets (ever see the swing-in-slide sets) a huge sand pit, and all the extras so all the kids want to play at my house and I know where my kids are Lunchtimes are the only down side because I will never give to my kids and not other kids visiting so all are included and get what my kids get.

Well that last part will certainly reduce the population real fast.

I think he is going for the out of touch writer persona.

I don't understand to be honest. If the "client" has no real money to speak of, how do you propose the insurance company or hospital will get reimbursed for the cost of defending the case if they win? This is my point, the people filing these suits have nothing to lose so even if your idea was put into effect, how do you get blood from a turnip?

Most of these guys don't have any money, if they had that kind of money they would not be trying to take money they do not deserve from the insurance and doctors. Even if you get a judgement, you get nothing but the paper it is written on. Again, there is nothing to take, but even if there was, it is very difficult to take money from people even when common sense tells us they have money but can hide it from the courts. Look at O.J. they have judgements against him, he haa a multi million dollar home here in Florida and somehow has plenty of money to keep that going and living life like a high roller, but looks on paper as if he is broke. Like Old Salt says, make it a crime to file a lawsuit that has no merrit and I would even take it so far to also charge the lawyer who should have known better.

So the time restriction favors women, and being as the women are also the only ones who know if they ever fooled around or not, that puts the man at a very bad place during the most difficult emotional state he can imagine. I think part of the child support process should require a DNA test be performed, that way nobody gets taken edvantage of and everyone knows they are operating without doubts. They know, I can tell you Florida law makers know what is going on, I have been involved in several information pushes to law makers on cases like the one I posted with the child support being paid for kids that are not his. The problem is if they suddenly allowed DNA evidence to be offered at any time to stop a man from paying for kids that are not his, a very large number of women would suddenly stop getting their payments, and then the state would have to support them. Did you know most states still allow a man to be named as the father of a child without him ever being in a court room? All they have to do is send a notice to your last known address (could be some abuse there as well) of the hearing and if you do not show, they default you as the father. One year later, you lose the right to appeal so all the woman has to do it not push for child support until the year is up and then the man is stuck paying for a kid he never made.

Divorce is a bad deal all around and while we are in the middle of it, sometimes we are not thinking in logical ways. At the time of his original divorce, he was so completely devistated his only concern was to get everything over with as fast as possible. This is one of my reason for not allowing abortion, it is difficult to see things clearly when your looking through glass stainded with emotions. My point is why must there be a time limit on doing what is right? Depression is a common effect from divorce and many never find their path out of that depression. Depression can effect judgement and the courts should not simply close their ears from hearing the truth just because the truth came past some artificial deadline. They claim they do not end child support payments in cases proven the man is not the father to do what is best for the child, not the wrongly treated man, so why not use the same logic in cases like this where the original order did not properly consider the best interest of the child and should be looked into again?

We already have that. Anyone with a decent case can get very good lawyers to take the case I believe for 36% of the payout. The problem is, the guy suing does not need to have a great lawyer because the trend is for juries to side with the "average Joe" and make big companies pay. It is like politics, if your poor and like the Robin hood mentality, you vote liberal. Juries are made of "average Joes" and tend to see themselves as victims of these big companies anyway. But again, it is difficult to change a mindset that allows people to try and cash in on things like this anyway. You change one rule, they find another to abuse. What ever happened to being a "man", standing on your own two feet and earning your way through life? Damn I must be getting old.

They just change the game. So you limit the amount of a lawsuit, okay, to get around the limits, you simply file seperate suits. Each suit is judged on it's own instead of doing them all at the same time. Then there is suing different people. Now they just lump everyone together but once you place limits, then their just gonna do it one person or company at a time. The problem is not the amount of money but the mindset of people looking to cash in on things. The system was never supposed to be abused in this way.

My point exactly.

And that is another example of mob rule. When we allow mobs to rule we get liberals. They do what the masses want instead of what is "right" for the Nation.

For the record, I did not post "zzzzzzzzzzzzzz" anywhere on the forum (well just now I did but not before). I simply said I agreed with Eddo, so now I guess it is bad to agree with othere with whom I agree with? Yes it was. No I was talking about Wez, and it was not an attack on him but a direct point being made to show how a person with good ideas can spoil those same ideas by taking things to extremes. I knew many did not have the ability to look past what looks like a personal attack to see the valid point I was making so I did not name Wez, as is evident by your own lack of understanding of my post. I did not in any way intend to demean or belittle Wez. I have openly told Wez that I believe he has some very good points sometimes but that it was the "extras" he includes that ruins our ability to take him seriously. And yet you leave his post calling me a lier in place, right. Keep up the great work.

This is the point. The second you make anything "free" billions of people will abuse it. Sure it "sounds" good to offer unified healthcare but the only thing you get then is all bad. By removing the system we have now, you remove the reason for innovation. All hospital workers become government workers and when was the last time you talked with a government worker who truly cared about helping anyone? The massive waiting lists for care in "every" nation with "free" healthcare is exactly what you will get here. There are stories of people pulling their own teeth for goodness sake, how free is that? No, the government cannot provide anything that is good, every program they run is a complete mess, and this will not be the exception. Bu the way, how do you "force" someone to purchase insurance? It is impossible, I can hear the ACLU lawyers getting ready for this one the second a minority gets any kind of trouble for not having insurance. I am sure it will be found to be unconstitutional if challenged. I support limiting lawsuits and even forming groups in every state to review cases and mandate mitigation. I also support forcing the medical world to stop the practice of over charging patients who can pay to cover costs of those that can't. It is a never ending cycle that is the biggest reason for crazy healthcare costs. The hospitals already take these losses off their taxes every year so it is like getting paid twice for the same loss.

If that was our honest opinion of the posted videos then yes, it is constructive, but feel free to delete our opinions as you see fit sir.

No, that time passed when they started holding you accountable for your excesses, and I'm loving it. Please stop posting to me unless you have something constructive to add to the conversation.

Like I care what you believe or don't believe, why must you keep chasing me around the forum calling me a lier? He has appealed and the judge quoted the Florida law requiring "significant change in circumstances" to cause a change in custody from an existing ruling. His response to the many appeals is that this woman had drug problems including legal problems at the time of the original order of custody and if that was not good enough reason then, it is not a good enough reason now. It seems some of you may not know just how bad the legal systems can get against men so let me enlighten you just a tad: In many states, you can get freed from a murder charge using DNA evidence 10 years later, but you can never be freed from paying child support if you prove your not the father using the same evidence: Dad wasn't dad after all, but still owes child support | csmonitor.com

With talk from both of the liberal canidates for President moving tword unified healthcare, I figured a discussion about how socialist medical care changes compared to the system we have in America: Full story: Wait times for surgery in Canada at all-time high: study Another direction to consider "if" there is a problem or not is to look and see what kinds (if any) of branching business get created to try and fill that void. Many companies have come into existance to help Canadians get the treatment they need but cannot get in a timely mannor in Canada. One example is Timely Medical Alternatives Inc: Private Medical Services – Timely Medical Alternatives Private Health Care Options Another is Med Solution Medical Tourism Services - Best hospitals overseas for affordable healthcare Obviously there is a problem when industry is designed around that problem. In fact, the problem with increased wait times is so large, there is conferance called "The Taming of the Queue" where experts meet and discuss how they can try and reduce the waiting times. They bring in experts from all over the world to partisipate with ideas and methods to try and help. The most recent was Aprin 4th and 5th 2007 and while there have been huge changes in reporting methods, the waiting times are still getting worse. Part of a speach by Tom McIntosh at the last conferance: I would rather work to earn great medical care than get piss poor medical care for free and that is my entire point for threads like this. As time goes by, the liberals get more and more insistant to have socialized medicine and I don't want our system to get the problems like other Countries have where people are pulling their own teeth or must go to other Countries to get needed care when they are already paying massive and unfair taxes to pay for a system they cannot use.

In fact it is almost impossible for a liberal to attack him because their too concerned to be called a racist. Even a conservative will have difficulties but there is enough "nothing" in Obama's past to get him on substance. I will gamble to say that there is some interesting stuff comming up to get Obama with but the Republican party is keeping mostly quiet so they stay at each other's throats instead of knocking one or the other out of the race so they can concentrate on Mccain. It is funny to watch the Clinton machine try and try again to make little attacks on Obama and see it blow up in their faces though, they deserve it after being so smug all last year almost claiming victory for Hilary before the process ever really started.